warrnwarriorfan wrote:How could a runner of this caliber not be getting a full scholarship somewhere?
I don't get it.
Oh well, congratulations!
Full track scholarships are nearly unheard of. I don't know anybody who got one besides Cory Leslie. Galen is one of elite in the state. I'm sure between FA+scholarship he is well taken care of. Congradulations!
Congrats buddy. I hope this decision works out for you.
Full Rides are rare for us runners....You just have to understand that Football and Basketball is bringing in the money so they are the ones who get the free rides to college. I know when I went on visits before I chose my school during my senior year of high school many coaches would come out and say that no one here gets a full ride....so it's pretty common no matter where you go.
ChuckHayes44 wrote:Congrats buddy. I hope this decision works out for you.
Full Rides are rare for us runners....You just have to understand that Football and Basketball is bringing in the money so they are the ones who get the free rides to college..
Only a handful of football programs (5-6) actually turn a profit. The rest lose money, so despite popular thinking that is not the reason for the scholarship disparity. Basketball costs less, so maybe 3 times that many programs turn a profit in that sport. Overall, though, all these sports lose money...and at a much more alarming rate than cross country or track. The reason for more scholarships in these sports is plain and simple: erroneous thinking on the part of trustee's and administrators that a successful program bring prestige and eventually admissions money to their school. They also hope to become the next George Mason or Boise State in terms of bringing in the big bucks for television, bowl purses, and merchandise sales for that short period of time following a big tournament run or season. These things arent usually sustainable, and if you research the Boise and George Mason situations you will find that the admissions booms werent either. They experienced a short spike in applications, but not actual enrollment. So the net gain from sporting success is not only negligible, but fleeting. I'm glad to see runners receive this money. I just hope that people can educate themselves about the nature of college athletics and see that the wool has been pulled over their eyes for far too long. They dont bring home the money, they just lose more...does that deserve reward?
I think you guys need to clarify your statements. Forbes.com has an article listing the Top 20 profitable programs and they make a BUNCH of money and do pay for other programs. Many D-1 football programs make money. Perhaps D-2/D-3 programs don't turn a profit, but there are definitely more than 5 or 6 D-1 programs making a ton of cash (millions).
I'm with you fan - the majority of D-1 BCS football programs are each athletic department's "cash cows". This is not a slap in the face to the other great sports these colleges field - it is just fact - people love their college football. It is what it is!!!!
Like it or not less than 10 DI programs are self sustaining without outside help from the university in the form of general fund (tax and student tuition) money, and even with that only about half can show a profit for their athletic department.
uhs_coach is right, most schools that do make a "profit" do so only with the help of money from the school and general fund. However, if you hold them responsible to the same degree that we hold a normal business and expect them to be self-sustaining then you will see that very few can make money on their own. Businesses do not receive an allowance like athletic programs do.